Is the 'female commander' the essence of Army trainee’s death?

A trainee in the Army collapsed during military training on May 23 and passed away two days later. This individual, who aspired to become a nurse, had only been in training for nine days prior to the incident. It was revealed that the intensity was extremely rigorous during the training, which included over an hour of push-ups and running while carrying equipment weighing more than 20 kilograms. Upon being rushed to the hospital, it was determined that the trainee's muscles had suffered severe damage. The presumed cause of death is septic shock resulting from exposure to a toxic substance.

There is a clear violation of regulations in this case. Army regulations explicitly state the necessity to prevent military training from crossing into cruelty by taking special care to avoid any potential for human rights violations. Furthermore, training can only proceed after receiving a confirmation letter from the trainee and only if the same mistake is repeated despite oral training. The physical condition of trainees must be carefully considered, and if training extends beyond an hour, a minimum rest period of 10 minutes must be provided. The court deemed the dismissal of a battalion commander who ordered subordinates to stand at attention for over an hour justified, declaring this order an "abusive act." This ruling was made four years ago.

In this case, the company commander and deputy company commander who ordered the training are currently under civilian police investigation. The military has deemed them guilty of professional negligence manslaughter. There are allegations that harsh military training has been conducted previously among soldiers who have passed through this unit. It's imperative that the police thoroughly investigate whether military training that violated regulations has been a recurring issue, not just in this incident but also in the unit's past. Additionally, they must determine whether the unit's command system to prevent and monitor such incidents has been functioning properly. Based on the outcome of the investigation, the military must take proactive measures to prevent similar incidents in the future. This requires a detailed analysis of the exact cause and the implementation of effective solutions.

Unexpectedly, what garnered significant attention online was the emergence of a disturbing phenomenon known as 'heterophobia.' This was fueled by the fact that the company commander who ordered the training happened to be a woman. On predominantly male-centric platforms, thousands of posts surfaced, often vaguely disclosing the commander's real name and alma mater. Speculation ran rampant, with many attributing the incident to the commander's gender. Comments insinuated that the tragedy occurred due to a female commander's supposed ignorance of physical limitations or suggested that she imposed unreasonable training to undermine male trainees' spirits. Shockingly, a post featuring a picture of the commander garnered hundreds of likes, accompanied by derogatory remarks such as, "Her short haircut makes her seem like a feminist who harbors animosity towards men."

This not only diverts attention from the core of the incident but also disrespects the trainee's tragic demise. If the gender of the commander were truly a significant factor, how do we reconcile this with the fact that the majority of the 655 perpetrators who died in military accidents over the past decade (2013 to 2022) were men? Whether the actions were driven by ignorance of physical limitations or malicious intent, it underscores a systemic issue within the military's command structure.

I am not inclined whatsoever to defend the suspects. It's imperative that the investigative agency meticulously considers the critique, suggesting that this incident was, in fact, a case of 'torture to death' perpetrated by state power. A thorough investigation must be conducted, and the responsible party must be duly punished. However, if we become fixated on demonizing and condemning one or two individuals, we risk achieving nothing more than a false sense of satisfaction that 'justice has been served.' Are those expressing heterophobic sentiments merely venting their anger because they perceive it as an opportune moment to do so?

The national interest and the public outrage sparked by such incidents constitute a finite 'social resource.' Over time, this outrage often diminishes, overshadowed by other pressing matters. To ensure that the government and the National Assembly take appropriate actions, they must refrain from singling out certain groups based on gender, age, or race for criticism. Instead, the focus should be on identifying the flaws within the system. This is the least we can do out of respect for the young man whose life was tragically lost.